-----

I OBJECT to the proposal for Waterloo South. This development would evict hundreds of public housing tenants from their homes for little to no public benefit - fewer than 100 hundred additional social housing units in a state with more than 50,000 households on the waiting list.

The 847 social housing units proposed for Waterloo South is far too low for a site of this size and development of this scale. This is an addition of only 98 social homes, while there are more than 1000 households on the waiting list for public housing in the inner city allocation zone. These are the people who need public housing right now; by the time the development is complete, there will be many more. Any development of public land should prioritise public housing.

In addition to a desperate need for more public housing, Redfern-Waterloo needs more housing that is affordable to Aboriginal people and families. The Redfern Waterloo Aboriginal Affordable Housing Campaign, which is supported by the Redfern Waterloo Alliance of Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisations and allied organisations, demands that 10% of any housing developed on government land is devoted to social and affordable housing for Aboriginal people. This is the least that the government should do to address the decades of state-sponsored gentrification and displacement of Aboriginal people from this neighbourhood, which was once home to tens of thousands of Aboriginal people and so crucial to the movement for self-determination.

When the redevelopment of the Waterloo estate was announced in December 2015, the Minister promised that 30% of new housing would be social housing. Under this proposal, only 28.2% of homes will be social housing – 57 fewer than promised. Nor will social housing make up 30% of the residential floor space of the proposed development – it will comprise only 26.5%.

Furthermore, the proposal seeks approval for 3,012 total units plus 10% bonus floor space for design excellence, whereas the City of Sydney proposal was for 3,012 units inclusive of this 10% bonus for design excellence. This is a cunning attempt to sneak in an extra several hundred units for private sale and is a further betrayal of the promised 30% social housing.

The fundamental problem with this proposal is that the NSW Land and Housing Corporation is trying to redevelop Waterloo at no cost to the NSW Government. Good planning outcomes are not possible under these financial constraints: too many homes are proposed and too few of them will be affordable to people on low and moderate incomes. The NSW Government and Commonwealth Government should instead fund the construction and acquisition of new public housing and the proper repair, maintenance and refurbishment of existing public housing. Yet even under the NSW Government’s self-imposed constraints, more social and affordable housing and better planning could be achieved if the site is retained in public ownership, as shown by a recent report by Dr Cameron Murray and Prof Peter Phibbs for Shelter NSW and by the submission of Prof Bill Randolph and Dr Laurence Troy to the Waterloo South Independent Expert Advisory Panel.

I strongly object to the proposal for Waterloo South. The budget-neutral model it follows should be abandoned. It is patently obvious that it would lead to far too many homes for the site yet far too few social and affordable ones.

Furthermore, a thorough social impact assessment of the proposed redevelopment is yet to be commissioned, despite the persistent demands of community organisations over the past six years. The Land and Housing Corporation and Department of Planning should go back to the drawing board to find the most socially beneficial approach to the Waterloo estate rather than the most financially beneficial one.